> Hi, everyone,
> I was surprised to see that old bromide about "Aramaic, Greek..."
> referring to the language spoken at the time of Yeshuah/Jesus. The
> Greek
> TR says HEBRAISTI. Eusebius, Epiphanious, Irenaeus, Origen, the Bishop
>
> Papias, Jerome, and others, wrote (more of less the same):"Matthew
> wrote his gospel in the Hebrew language..." (Im quoting offhand).
> One of those quotations would be enough to dispel any doubts, let
> alone
> six of them, including the Word of God. There were some Aramaisms,
> surely, and some Greek borrowed words, but surely one can seen the
> Hebrew
> syntax under the surface ("And...And...And behold...)
> What do you think?
>
Aramaic was the "Hebrew Language" that Eusebius, Papias, etal refer.
There is ample evidence that Aramaic was the spoken "lingua franca" at
the time of Y'shua and that he spoke Aramaic as his native language.
One example is what I calla"bilingualism" in Luke in his reporting of
the LP. The Greek speaking author
of GMatt writes:
KAI AFEJ (HMIN OFEILHMATA (MWN WJ KAI 9HMEIJ AFIEMEN TOIJ
OFEILETAIJ (HMWN using the Greek for DEBTS/DEBTORS.
The ARAMAIC is:
w$bowq ln xowbin )ykn) d)p xnn $bqn lxybyn where ONLY in the
Aramaic idiom
is HOBIN/L'HOYBIN a metaphor for SIN/SINNERS.
Luke, demonstrating his bilingualism knew that the DEBT/SIN metaphor was
lost
in Greek, therefore he wrote:
KAI AFEJ (HMIN TAJ AMARTIAJ (HMWN KAI GAR AUTOI AFIEMEN PANTI OFEILONTI
(MIN...using the Aramaic metaphorical sense of HOBIN/SIN in the
1st half and returning to the Greek participial form of DEBT in the 2nd
half.
The is, to me, a clear case where the Greek word did not reflect the
Aramaic idiom and Luke uses a qualifier (AMARTIAJ).
This is also eveidence, to me, and contrary to the opinion of the
JS, that the
LP, or portions of it, were authentic to the Aramaic speaking Jesus.
Jack Kilmon
jpman@accesscomm.net